A few weeks ago I came across a post on Civil3D.com that linked to this article on a lawsuit that has been filed against Autodesk by an eBay Seller whose name is Timothy S. Vernor. Mr. Vernor makes an income by selling products on eBay and had posted a used copy of AutoCAD 14 for sale on the site.
According to Autodesk’s EULA (End Users License Agreement) AutoCAD is nontransferable and when you “purchase” AutoCAD you are not actually purchasing the software, but a “license” to use the software. This EULA reads “by opening the sealed software packet(s), you agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of this license agreement“. There is a major problem here; the EULA is inside of the packaging, therefore the end user has no idea of this “agreement” until they’ve opened the software.
With the most recent release AutoCAD 2008 there is a statement on the back of the case that reads “This software is licensed subject to the license agreement that appears during the installation process or is included in the package. If after reading the agreement you do not wish to accept its terms, you may return the software as provided in the agreement.” The statement is also on the previous 2007 release. It is not on 2006. I’m not sure if this statement was on the 14 release, but we can likely make the safe assumption that this statement was not on a release as early as 14 if it’s not on 2006.
You can read 4 of the letters exchanged between Mr. Vernor and Autodesk’s lawyer Andrew S. Mackay here and the text of the complaint here. Being a layman when it comes to copyright law it appears to me that Mr. Vernor has a strong case.
At first he was representing himself in the lawsuit, but now Public Citizen has stepped up to the plate and offered to represent him at no cost. Read about it here.
I have been an Autodesk user for 14 years and I have experienced their dishonest practices first-hand. I have been lied to by resellers to scare me into upgrading and I (or rather my employer) have been “forced” into purchasing a subscription rather than simply buying the upgrade. This locks one into a yearly fee for “upgrades” that are not always necessary. In addition, the products are extremely pricey at around $4,000 and up. User guides, the help file, and tutorials provided with the software are generally vague which makes training almost a necessity (unless you’re one of those really smart people) which also costs a great deal of money (several hundred to several thousand dollars depending on what type of training).
Don’t get me wrong, I love their products and will continue to use them, but in this case (no pun intended), I hope Vernor wins. Nothing personal… Well, not really.
